This blog is about fairness; about looking at objects from multiple perspectives. Stable transformation comes only slowly; and only if the environment is free of sporadic jitters of passion and anger that destabilize growth. I strongly believe that the path to peace crosses through the battle with self.

Tuesday, October 2, 2007

Mo'aragh

Moaraq is the wood art craft. The designs are completed with making precision cuts in different types of wood and juxtaposing them to create the image. The art of Mo'arag has been reviving in Iran over the past 15 years.Origin of concept, perhaps China.The earliest objects found, from the 13th century.

=====================================I have been encountering weird people these days. With comments such as these:

The mullah regime would not be so stupid as to launch such weapons at first blush, but the very fact of having them will destroy stability in the entire Middle East, where, as we know, tempers are flammable in the extreme. Can you imagine a scenario with not only Iran and Israel possessing such hellfire, but also Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Jordan and who knows who else?

To that end, and to my great dismay, if the mullah regime does not climb down from their atomic tree, EVERY MEANS is justified to stop them from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Given the choice between the destruction of the world and the destruction of one country, basic logic dictates that that country would, sadly, have to be sacrificed.

Such people sicken me! Regardless of how sophisticated they think they are! Looking back, at American paranoia about Russia, I just see this nation is not cured of the absurdity of their so-called logic!

The basic argument of the esteemed lady is that If Iran stands up for itself, then every other country in the middle east may do that as well, and therefore she CONCLUDES that since all these people are loonies, they will erupt into a nuclear hellfire, and THUS she wants to use EVERY MEAN to stop Iran, to prevent this "potential" hellfire! This level of paranoia is pathological! This level of disrespect is intolerable!

I am tired of all these humans who think themselves intellectually "advanced", yet they are so DUMB in their basic ways of reasoning.

Signs indicate that Iran is planning to supply its militant proxies in Iraq with shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles. The threat of SAM shipments into Iraq is a useful pressure tactic for Iran to use in its negotiations with the United States over Iraq, but should the threat materialize, Tehran will be crossing a huge redline with Washington.https://www.stratfor.com/products/premium/barrier.php?err=3&prodid=&subid=&url=/products/premium/read_article.php?id=296052&id=296052&camp=

While I agree that nuclear threats - no matter where they are - are indeed a threat to people everywhere, I can't help but wonder why it is only the Middle east and Russia that is of the greatest concern. There are many other countries, America included who already have nuclear capabilities. Why is it that weapons such as this are only a threat in certain places?

I look at our current foreign relations and I have to say that if I were in another country I would view us as a threat as well.

Our idiotic government has opened up a can of worms that they will not be able to close, or clean up for a very long time.

I am sure with the standards set by Columbia University's Lee Bollinger,

A nation shouting "Death to America!" for 28 years

Sorry, Nourizadeh = spy!

Those you’re "Alliance" in Iraq Chalabi, Maliki, Ja'afry, Talabani..... Are they all nationalists and lovely people that you look for alliance with them against US?Very strange idea Naj!!!

Are you kidding here?

Looks you are so out of control that make your thoughts confusing a paranoid to the level your assessments so confusing about who is in Iraq now and who are these guys and who stand behind them from behind the curtain.

These are guys not better than your follow Iranian that you call him SPY.

Re "shouting death to America"I absolutely do NOT condone any shouting death to anyone, and do consider that an act of radical rhetoric. However, I challenge you to produce ONE mullah or Iranian who has looked an American in the eye and has wished death upon them.

Can you distinguish between political slogans and interpersonal mannerisms??

1- those names are not mentioned anywhere in my blog, so you fabricated them out of thin air as "my" allies!

2. Maliki and Chalabi are the US allies! It was Chalabi who unleashed America on Saddam, no?

3. that Nourizadeh shares similarities with Chalabi makes him more of a despicable figure for me.

By the way, why don't you dare reveal your name and nationality. I am indeed getting confused by all these anonyms! Perhaps if you pick a pseudoname, I can decipher some coherence in whatever argument you are trying to make.

Thi thing is, when there are idiots like that skye frontier who think "ANY MEANS" are justifiable in world to reach a certain end, we will not break this cycle!

Had US not tested the atomic bomb on Japan, had it not created a nuclear monster out of Russia (while in reality it was the labour movements and communism that it feared, and tried to protect the CORPORATIONS from) we would not be rigging the earth for its radioactive material!

Americans have been complacent during the cold war, and complicit in any atrocity that will fall out of this new standoff!

Khamenei Says West is "Illiterate" while Iran Is "Learned, Rational"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_DtqjhLvLk&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Emusicman%2Ecom%2Fmotarjem%2Fmotarjem%2Ehtml

"Britsh MPs visiting the Pentagon to discuss America's stance on Iran and Iraq were shocked to be told by one of President Bush's senior women officials: "I hate all Iranians."http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=484762&in_page_id=1770&ito=newsnow

If we change the dateline from Tehran to Washington, insert a few other similar contextual adjustments, and substitute "the Republican Party during the current Bush Administration" for the phrase "Revolutionary Guards", we're a lot closer to describing an actual terrorist organisation. Can someone out there draft the appropriate resolution for submission to the Majlis?

====

Iran Revolutionary Guards' role growing

By SALLY BUZBEE The Associated Presshttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071002/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_the_guards

TEHRAN, Iran - They own car factories and construction firms, operate newspaper groups and oil fields and increasingly, serve in parliament or become provincial governors. To supporters, the Revolutionary Guards are the cream of Iran's talent.

To the United States, they are simply terrorists.

Either way, the group formed to safeguard Iran's 1979 Islamic revolution has pushed well beyond its military roots: Current and former members now hold a growing role across the country's government and economy, sometimes openly and other times in shadow.

The election of a hard-line president two years ago sharply accelerated that influence, recent interviews here suggest. Supporters of supreme leader Ali Khamenei and his protege, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, have sought to consolidate power by putting allies in key positions, potentially shaping Iran for years to come.

"We don't support it," Mohsen Mirdamadi, who leads Iran's largest pro-reform party, said of the guards' spreading influence. "It can be reversed with a change of government — but slowly."

Publicly, the guards now own or control numerous companies that receive lucrative, often no-bid government contracts in the oil and gas industry, farming, and road and dam construction. Their winning of deals is often announced outright in Tehran newspapers.

Other times, the group's business deals are shrouded in mystery and merely whispered about.

In one example, the guards are thought to run a network of unauthorized docks and trading firms importing consumer goods, tariff-free, into Iran, said Mehdi Khalaji, a researcher at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

That would be a lucrative business in Iran, where Western goods are harder to obtain.

In addition, an Iranian company that manufactures Japanese cars inside Iran is also thought to be owned by the guards, said Khalaji.

The guards have gained a particularly big role in the country's oil and gas industry in recent years, as the national oil company has signed several contracts with a guards-operated construction company. Some have been announced publicly, including a $2 billion deal in 2006 to develop part of the important Pars gas field.

Often, firms owned by Revolutionary Guards will get noncompetitive bids for major oil or construction projects and then outsource the project to others, operating essentially as a "private mafia," said Karim Sadjadpour, an Iranian-American who works at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.

Ray Takeyh, an Iran expert at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, said the guards also have gained lucrative telecommunications contracts, and have known links with university labs, weapons makers and firms linked to Iran's nuclear program. All are industries with clear dual-use — civilian and military — potential, giving the guards firm links to many vital military-related industries.

The business deals also make the guards less reliant on Iran's more democratic and transparent institutions, such as parliament, for their funding. The no-bid government contracts often lack any independent oversight such as from parliament's budget process, meaning money from them can be diverted into overseas operations with little notice, other analysts said.

At least 80 former guards also are in parliament out of a total of 290 seats. Others serve as mayors and provincial governors. Former commanders also make up about two-thirds of the current Cabinet, according to some estimates, and Ahmadinejad himself is a former guards commander who went on to Tehran's mayor before being elected president.

That influence is a far cry from the group's original roots: It was founded in 1979 in the revolution's wake to provide a counterbalance to the U.S.-trained military at a time when Iran's new Islamic leaders feared the army might remain loyal to the deposed shah.

The Revolutionary Guards won widespread admiration and even public reverence in the 1980s when they defended Iran from Saddam Hussein's regime during the long, devastating Iran-Iraq war.

Now numbering about 125,000 members, they report directly to the supreme leader and officially handle internal security. The small Quds Force wing is thought to operate overseas, having helped to create the militant Hezbollah group in 1982 in Lebanon and to arm Bosnian Muslims during the Balkan wars.

The Bush administration accuses the Quds Force of sending fighters and deadly roadside bombs, mortars and rockets to kill American troops in Iraq in recent years — allegations that Iran denies.

The United States pressures U.S. and European banks to do no business with Iranian banks, such as Bank Sedarat that the Bush administration believes help finance guards' business operations. But the United States is also considering naming the entire group as a foreign terrorist organization, presumably allowing wider financial crackdowns.

Hard-liners within Iran generally both downplay and defend the guards' role.

Hossein Shariatmadari, a former guard member himself who is close to Khamenei, now runs the large Kayhan group of newspapers and magazines in Tehran. He said the prominence of former guards in business and politics is understandable because they often have the engineering training and management skills to run many industries. The group's primary focus remains safeguarding the country from outside threats, especially from the West, he said.

Even some outsiders wonder how much a terrorist designation would really do. Takeyh called the guards' business enterprises "murky and ambiguous" and said it would thus be difficult to target them precisely.

In addition, not all former guards are hard-liners. Many members of the country's reform movement and democratic opposition are also former guards, Takeyh noted, "making a terrorist label even more problematic."

naj Iran should stand up for herself. What stinks is with Ahmadinejad and the idiot Decider we know how this will end and neither one wants to avoid but is inviting it and it is terrible knowing what it means for us and the entire world. I just saw the anonymous proxy comment. Bush of course is doing it too!

I have a comment about the guards.When I was growing up, we considered them as some form of fascist police. Simply, the sight of their card made the hair stand on out back. Notorious was an understatement.

Then they faded out of public eye, and started becoming more of an elite force, and less of a nuisance to our peace and tranquility. They merged difference policing bodies, and the guards (paasdaran) were no longer a part of daily fascism! Then fascism disappeared. That was when the war ended. And thinge started becoming less and less scary. The harassments became less public. The harassments were no longer carried out by the "official" forces, but by ugly stinky men and women who tried to correct the public morality.

And then different factions from within the Mullah community began to emerge! And with that the infightings!

One of the "heroes" of the reform movement, Akbar Ganji WAS a paasdar!

At this juncture of history, as an Iranian, pointed out with the most UNFAIR warfare, I am forced to throw my support behind the likes of Ahmadinejad and Khamenei. I am forced to throw my support behing the guards. They are dedicated and faithful, poweful both intellectually, militarily and economically.

I NEED to defend my country, and need well trained and smart people to trust.

It is for that reason that they are targeting the guards. Not because they are terrorist, but because they are the ones who are most likely to kick the invader's imperialist bottom!

===================================

Jim

Ahmadinejad is playing an international game. Nationally, Iranians are hating him for that. But I cannot blame Ahmadinejad for strategizing.

And encounter with the US will empower these Mullahs eternally!

Those who are missing a big chance here are the Democrats, who are exacerbating a grave situation under influence of the Zionist lobby!

I cite some of it:Dressed that way, she states in a casual aside to respectable Britons, as though they'll understand and be anything other than appalled, "I hate all Iranians." Did she preface the remark with, "Just between us imperialists"? Did she expect that they'd just nod in sympathy and keep the matter to themselves? The Mail reports they were in fact "taken aback," which of course speaks somewhat well for them.

So now the word is out, but predictably, denied. "She doesn't speak that way," an unnamed Defense Department official assured the Mail. It's not fashionable in the early 21^st century to hate entire peoples, and there are actually laws in civilized countries against hate speech. A Defense Department official cannot say to British MPs, "In any case, I hate all Jews," for example. This was possible in the 1930s, but would be political suicide today. But maybe you can say what Cagan did, without job consequences.

When you have the entire Senate calling for the U.S. to "confront" Iran, the entire Congress deferring to AIPAC in its refusal to demand that Bush consult with it before attacking Iran, the Persian Empire of Xerxes ludicrously depicted as the enemy of "freedom" in a popular film, the president of a great U.S. university taking the opportunity of the Iranian president's invited visit to insult him at length before conceding to him the podium---well, you know that norms of civility no longer apply. Logic, reason, balance pale before the power of myth and backwards reasoning of those seeking to create their own new, wild and spectacularly crazy reality. The Nazis called it "the triumph of the will"---the will that slams down the hated, weaker, lesser peoples and allows the Ubermenschen, the supermen, to realize their fate.

Somehow it seems fitting that a Defense Department official should speak so frankly as three U.S. aircraft carriers linger off the Iranian coast, the well-financed anti-Iran disinformation campaign swells, and neocon ideologues granted extensive White House access explicitly demand the bombing of Iran. It is the natural culmination of the vilification trend. If you hate all of them (and are grotesquely ignorant of their vast contribution to human civilization), why not nuke them, and their monuments and treasures, and destroy their 3000 year history, and "wipe them off the map"? Why not prepare public opinion for that shattering scenario, and grind those boot heels into the brains of any sympathizers of those you call "sand-niggers" as you try to spread Bush's gospel of hate?

There was another dude bugging me yesterday with his enlightened comments about civilization. The esteemed gentelman was lecturing me on the differences between culture and civilization and was stating how he hates the Chinese and Indian culture (although he admires their 'civilization')

I think if these dudes just bomb us chemically, then can preserve the "civilization" and just get rid of us and our annoying "subtle" non-yankee culture!!

1) When Bush calls a nation evil, isn't that a strong argument for respecting it?

2) Ummm....Pakistan has nukes already.

I've previously said that an Iran with nuclear weapons doesn't send me to my Happy Place. That's only because I'm against nuclear weapons in general, and Israel would probably freak out like a squirrel on crystal meth and nuke someplace like Salt Lake City. Then they'd spread "Greetings from Tehran!" leaflets around the blast site.

In the cold hard calculus of power, all feelings aside, Iran may well prove to be an effective counter-balance to Israel. It would be comparatively very stable compared to Saudi Arabia in that role, probably even to Turkey. Establishing a Palestinian state would be necessary in that context.

In addition to a burdensome paranoia engendered by past sins in the region, Israel contemplates using all means to delay the day of Palestinian statehood. For Israelis, equality guarantees danger, and a Palestinian state for them would be like seeing Nelson Mandela getting elected president was for white South Africans.

As to the insane comment you received, please know that there are more of us who feel all humans are valuable and wonderful creatures. She has her own personal problems and only she can deal with them.

How can I "ignore" this commentator, when she is a Zionist, speaks AIPAC's line, and while AIPAC's determining the course of politics in this monsterous government of USA, n which, even the people of USA seem to no longer have a control!

They say we don't want war: their democratic senate goes ahead and makes a banner of "let's sacrifice Iran"

So when you go to Iran to join those well trained and smart people bravery guys who trained the "Drilling Militia" in Iraq?

"Allow me to propose my own theory about Iran. The theory is that Iran and the U.S. have the same interests in the Middle East. "

" It’s imperitive to Iran that they support the right groups and the right nations, like the U.S. they need nations to feel dependent on them, Hezbollah, Syria, some Shia’a groups in Iraq and even some Sunni groups. These groups will only be funded and supplied until their utility is expired. It is not a matter of defending Shi’ites like half of humanity believes, I’ll give you proof.

From 1988 to 1994 a war was fought between Armenia and Azerbaijan. During the war Iran supplied their most advanced weapons to the Armenians, who are 99% Christian, to help them fight the Azeri’s who are mostly Shi’a Muslims. The strategy of helping defeat the Azeri’s was to not empower Azeri’s who make up 24% of the Iranian population (the 2nd largest in Iran).

Similar power struggles go on in Iraq. Many of the Iranian fighters in Iraq are there fighting Muqtada al Sadr’s Shi’a fighters who are staunchly anti-Iran and pro Arab unity. Iran’s interest is to stay in Iraq, fight both sides and prolong the battle, making the Iraqi government more reliant on Irans support.

Essentially Iran and the U.S. are fighting for the same piece of the pie, they both desire control of the Iraqi government and access to the oil. They are both fighting for who will influence the Arab nations and they are both battling both sides of the conflict in Iraq in order to tip the war in their favor."

http://www.mideastyouth.com/2007/07/13/the-iranianus-agenda/

So the War with Iran will not be an option whatever we hear loud voices now or later, in worse case scenario there will be a small hit and run as a slap to the Gulf 's Sheikh's faces to continue milking their huge Petrodollars by arm sale, security agreements, troops hosting all sort of that that make US's advance feet's in the region and protecting the energy resource for their future dependency of the energy from ME.

This is a balanced article; but it doesn't change the fact:Homosexuality in Iran does not exist, LIKE IT DOES HERE (in the US/UK/EU)

The second part of this sentence is chopped from the media buzz.

Transsexuals are tolerated in Iran and are given the liberty and the finances they need to undergo sex-change operation, if they wish so. To undergo sex-change, they need to seek psychiatric counseling first, just to be sure that people don't change sex on a psychological whim, but only out of physiological necessity!

Should there be homosexual liberty in Iran? Yes! Like anywhere. Shoudl homosexuality be a public discourse? In my opinion, state should stay out of people's private lives.

Is there any form of homosexual liberty anywhere in the Muslim world? No!

Can Iran circumvent the Islamic rule? Not legislatively.

Can Iran suddenly claim it is not an Islamic Republic? No!

Will people tolerate a "liberal" state? No! The experience of Pahlavis has proven that!

However, iranian courts can circumvent the legislations by turning a blind eye on homosexual cases. Do they do that? Yes! Otherwise a large percentage of Iranian people would have been executed by now :)

Same sex relations in Iran are just more convenient. The state is not eves dropping on people behind closed doors. You can live with your boyfriend for ever and no one will cast a doubt or say anything, UNLESS you have made an enemy!

As for the asylum seekers. Please keep one thing in mind:A percentage of Iranians are willing to do all they can to leave the country. (This should be more embarrassing to Ahmadinejad than having gays or not.) The refugee claims in the 80s used to revolve around political distress. Now, homosexuality and women abuse claims are the dominant ones.

Again, if the world opened their doors to Iranians, and let Iranian youth travel as they wished, they wouldn't have to be seeking residency in the form of refugee status.

I am not suggesting people are liars. But I know that Iranian authorities are NOT on a gay-hunt mission.

The crackdowns in Iran, on minorities, on women, on gays, on foreign visiting intellectuals, are just a paranoid reaction and reflective of IRI's fear of a velvet revolution.

A few months ago, the 1-million campaign organizers were arrested, a few month later, Iranian scholars, maybe 3 years ago it was gays ... these are all political reactions.

People can be gay, as much as they want. But to come out of closet, they need to cross a THICK cultural wall! That wall is far harder to break than the legal one!

In a way, it is good that this discussion has become public, because now the religious and the legal people will have to come up with a Fatwa to get them out of this one! Iran is claiming the leadership of Islamic modernity/modernism, so shiite "mojyahed" better be busy with this one!

As Ahmadinejad said, "we don't have gays, LIKE YOU HAVE HERE."Our gays are not fighting for their right to marriage. Our gays do not want to kiss eachother in parks. Our gays are not discriminated against if they want to join the army. Our gays are not thrown out of school.

Iranian gays who disguise their sexual preference, are the safe ones. Those who make a political case of their sexuality, are in danger. Should they be? No! Would they be prosecuted UNLESS they go political? No! But then, even cats and dogs who go political are in danger of prosecution, so nothing particularly gay there!

Ask Iranians who you know: our culture is full of gay jokes! ask them to tell you about Ghazvini jokes!

What is more disturbing, than whether there are gays on Iran or not, is that Pentagon spokes people go around and liberally say "we hate all Iranians"

This is what we need to fume over now, not whether Iran has gays or not!

You know, one of the problems with people's confusion about Iran's westernness or easternness comes from the Iranian society itself.

The exposure of the world to Iranians, in the past 30 years, has been through a minority of affluent and westernized Iranians who live abroad.

Many of these people consider themselves exiles, victims of the IRI. But his minority of Iranians was also detached from the reality of the Iranian society BEFORE revolution. THAT was the reason why the revolution happened.

Iran's course of Islamic modernity is going to prove to be a more stable one than the case tried by Pahlavi's.

One of the common curses of the the older generation, in critique of the IRI is: "God damn them for disgracing Islam". Unfortunately, the Iranians who live abroad, have not given themselves the chance to experience the Iran that is becoming. That is why most of them have joined the cacophony of the neocons, beating the war drums against Mullahs.

Mullahs are not eternal entities. They are aging, they are dying. The new generation of Iranians needs air to breath. And no one has suffocated them as much as Bush has. The "Axis of Evil" set the reform movements in Iran back.

I wish Iranians recognized that at this very moment, a holocaust is being plotted against the Iranians. At some point, just as the history is judging the NY Jews who turned away the European Jewish refugees (and sent them to Palestine!!) are considered accomplices of Hitler in crime, any Iranian who joins teh Bush war against Iran will be complicit in this crime!

First to be crystal clear I am against any war on Iran, I am not suggesting or in favor of any criminal war here.

But if we can say IF US troops advancing on the ground with them those criminals over US tanks as Naj like to call them, wonder those Mullah in Tehran will they send Fatwa like Sistani did in Najaf asking in his Fatwa to welcome US troops!

Naj talking about alliances with Iraq, where many of those if not all of them helped US to lunch her war on Iraq, but Naj never give us her views clearly, instead she started personal attacks on me representing here double standard very clear with lack of politeness and a doggy attitude toward anyone differ to her views, she is not sincerely engaging in a serous discussion with others.

BTW, Naj, where our friend YenPen? What happen to him?Or you block him from your site as you threaten me to block my comment through every time.

Stop acting like a pushy interrogator. Express your opinion and if I wish I will respond to you. If not, I won't!

If you are totally out of whack, I will make fun of you!

If you are lying, I will refute you!

If you just contribute to the campaign of disinformation against Iran, if you are throwing insults, if you are raising divisive and radical nonsensicals, and if you comment in Arabic, a wrd of which I do not understand, I WILL reject you!

If this is not clear to you, go play elsewhere. Alternatively, get a blog of your own and post counter-arguments to those offered by me. Who's preventing you from that. I have little time to spend on losers, okey?!

Ok, Madam again very scary stuff and very disgusting replay and nonsense talk.

Before putting your nasty words toward a person who commenting in your blog, without respecting his view just because oppose to what you holding in your head with your hysterical comment clearly reflected how outfit person you are, as a blogger where are the balanced, fair and wisdom talks/ communications with all levels of readers.

The Problem with you, you are trying to defend indefinable a case here "Iran/Mullah" which indefinable case Iran had have problems with all neighbours and others countries around the word from 1979 till now, this tells a truth loudly, its not just one problem with one country or one neighbour about borders or water.

Moreover, Iran citizens suffering and they have spoken out and suffer from Mullah Regime which you defending indirectly by distancing yourself from the Mullah regime or something else that secret in your head.

If you are lying, I will refute you!

If you think there are lies I am more than happy you tell us what lies I put or produced so far?

Bulling me and claming that I am " pushy interrogator" its really out of the blue and its mirror you more than me in fact telling opposite what claims you put against me.

I never said any "disinformation against Iran" if that the case then responded with what gives us the real information about Iran with your hard works.

if you are throwing insults, if you are raising divisive and radical nonsensicals

Did I? You need to go back and recall my recent post to you which highlights your insults, raising divisive and radical nonsensicals comment you made about Islam, Arabs and others matter not in my head now but I will keep my eyes and remind you again and again Naj.

Finally I just add who is the losers

The losers is the one who skips serious discussions about matters raise by commentators, thrown personal attacks, thrown lies and insults on the commentators in his blog.

Wish you all the best with your blog owned by very wobbly doggy person

and if you comment in Arabic, a wrd of which I do not understand, I WILL reject you!

One thing forgot to comment on, while you and other readers comments some times in Farsi, which is not all the reader understand Farsi, why not then if there is link in Arabic which have some points about the subject that you posted will be rejected by you?

Is this fair thing to do? It does not matter that the owner of blog knew the language that some link to be post or not the point is to enrich the discussion despite I believe there are many Iranians who mostly posted and filtered by you in your blog knew Arabic, for very simple reason as a Muslims first and secondly as Iranians which most Iranians knew Arabic in different level if not full.

Complete stupidity, sick with schizophrenia can not adapted to the new live offered by the free democratic world, you can’t learn and adapting the good behaviors and attitude as the rest of the world; sadly you DONT deserve to be in free Democratic world.

I am not bothered by this particular anonymous behavior. It is amusing, in fact. But because he is not making any contribution to any discussion (although he claims he does) I kick him out, just to keep the thread of discussions coherent and manageable!

Some humans, who are incapable of self-expression, are compelled to do other-denounciation.

And when people attack a blogger "personally", they show their utter lack of content!

Chris Matthews had barely finished praising his colleagues at the 10th anniversary party for his “Hardball” show Thursday night in Washington, D.C. when his remarks turned political and pointed, even suggesting that the Bush administration had "finally been caught in their criminality."

In front of an audience that included such notables as Alan Greenspan, Rep. Patrick Kennedy and Sen. Ted Kennedy, Matthews began his remarks by declaring that he wanted to "make some news" and he certainly didn't disappoint. After praising the drafters of the First Amendment for allowing him to make a living, he outlined what he said was the fundamental difference between the Bush and Clinton administrations.

The Clinton camp, he said, never put pressure on his bosses to silence him.

“Not so this crowd,” he added, explaining that Bush White House officials -- especially those from Vice President Cheney's office -- called MSNBC brass to complain about the content of his show and attempted to influence its editorial content. "They will not silence me!" Matthews declared.

"They've finally been caught in their criminality," Matthews continued, although he did not specify the exact criminal behavior to which he referred. He then drew an obvious Bush-Nixon parallel by saying, “Spiro Agnew was not an American hero."

Matthews left the throng of Washington A-listers with a parting shot at Cheney: “God help us if we had Cheney during the Cuban missile crisis. We’d all be under a parking lot.”

Following his remarks, a few network insiders and party goers wondered what kind of effect Matthews' sharp criticism of the White House would have on Tuesday's Republican debate in Dearborn, Michigan, which Matthews co-moderates alongside CNBC's Maria Bartiromo.

"I find it hard to believe that Republican candidates will feel as if they're being given a fair shot at Tuesday's debate given the partisan pot-shots lobbed by Matthews this evening," said one attendee.

About Me

I am an Iranian woman. I am not an activist of any feminist cause, but my tales are those of the resilience of my country, half-filled with mothers, sisters, wives and lovers of different shades of creativity and participation. Here, I show a bit of how we resist, as men and women.